The present invention relates to a waterbed with a reinforced rail assembly.
In recent years, beds which utilize fluid-filled mattresses, commonly known as waterbeds, have become popular. Waterbeds have evolved from relatively simple arrangements consisting of water-filled bladders supported and confined by bulky, hard, peripheral support frames to waterbed mattresses and foundation combinations having the same general size and appearance as a conventional innerspring mattress and foundation set. These arrangements are desirable because they are pleasant in appearance and use, and may employ standard bed clothes such as mattress covers and fitted sheets.
One such waterbed is known as the soft-sided or hybrid system. Traditionally, however, soft-sided waterbeds have been manufactured as a unitary structure. As a result, waterbed manufacturers have experienced a hardship in economically distributing their product. This is because, in contrast with the conventional innerspring of foam mattress manufacturers, waterbed manufacturers generally do not operate multiple plants which service a relatively small regional areas. Rather, they tend to operate one or two plants which destribute on a national basis. Consequently, because of the freight cost, the importance of compact readily shippable systems has dominated design considerations in soft-side or hybrid systems. The conventional response to this dilemma has manifested itself in various "readyto-assemble" systems which, for the most part, are deep fill units (i.e., 8" to 12" water depth).
Because of the construction of a "well" type structure on these foundations, it is far simpler to develop designs for the "ready-to-assemble" upper cavity which depend on the walls of the "well" to locate and assist in retaining the assembled top cavity. Virtually all such designs require hardware (i.e, nuts, bolts, wing-nuts, etc.) to assemble, thus necessitating tools. The difficulty with this conventional response is that missing hardware, stripped threads, burred screw or bolt heads may frequently puncture the vinyl water mattress, etc. Furthermore, many of the traditional soft-sided systems have to be shipped with the cavity assembled which increased bulk, thereby increasing the transportation costs.
There have been difficulties in the industry in manufacturing a compact, economically shipped, simple, tool-free assembly, "ready-to-assemble" hybrid system designed for the increasingly popular low fill type system (i.e., tube systems, 31/2" to 6" fill). Such difficulties are illustrated in considering the approaches conventionally used in soft-side waterbeds.
A first approach has been to construct systems having an 8" or greater fill depth. In this fashion, the foundation unit could be constructed with a "well" type of wall structure about the perimeter. This permitted a top cavity to be located atop the perimeter wall with reinforcements. Alternately, a part of the top cavity wall could extend down into the "well" or inside of the foundation perimeter wall. It appeared that this solved the problem of constructing a soft-side waterbed which would structurally inhibit bowing of the side wall. However, two problems remain unanswered by this approach. First, this did not answer the bowing potential in low fill (6" or less) systems. Second, it did not, in all cases, provide for a compact, economically shipped and easily assembled unit. Further, waterbeds which required hardware for assembly still had the problems missing hardware, and burred hardware which could damage other components.
A second approach has been to construct a low fill (6" or less) soft-sided waterbed structure. In such systems, either a rigid deck or a flexible foam pad, serve as the unifying component to which all other structural components are fastened. The difficulty, however, with such structures is that they necessitate shipping in a fully assembled state, thus not resolving the problem of bulk and higher freight costs.
A third approach has been to construct a cross-over type soft-sided system that requires installation in a shorter walled hard-sided type system or a molded hard-sided type structure. These structures are not truly soft-sided systems and did not satisfactorily resolve the problem.
A fourth approach has been to reinforce the wall structure of the top cavity of the waterbed. Though this approach somewhat prevents bowing, the presence of reinforcing members can create problems when using the bed. In some cases, the placement and position of reinforcing members results in penetration into the foam cushioning such that it is "cut" into. In addition, this approach causes an uncomfortable, "boardy" feeling. Further, such reinforcements significantly decrease the overall durability of the waterbed systems.